ASM International

1059-9495/$19.00

JMEPEG (2010) 19:287293

DOI: 10.1007/s11665-009-9456-0

Microstructure-Related Properties of Some Novel

Reinforcement Bar Steel
B.K. Panigrahi
(Submitted August 2, 2008; in revised form April 7, 2009)
Mechanical properties particularly Charpy impact toughness of two low-carbon [(a) 0.11% phosphorus and
(b) 0.009% niobium] thermomechanically treated reinforcing bar steels were investigated. The phosphorus
and niobium steels showed tensile to yield strength ratio of 1.25 and 1.19, ductile-brittle transition temperature of 223 K and below 193 K at yield strength levels of 428 and 472 MPa, respectively. The improved
toughness of phosphorus steel is attributed to a mixed transformation microstructure comprising lowcarbon bainite and ne polygonal ferrite. Lowest ductile-brittle transition temperature was observed in the
niobium steel due to overall neness of microstructure consisting mainly of low-carbon bainite, acicular
ferrite, and polygonal ferrite.

Keywords

impact behavior, microstructure, P/Nb-alloyed rebar,

tensile properties

1. Introduction
Considering that large areas of Indian subcontinent are
situated in earthquake prone zones (Ref 1), effort has been
directed in recent years to develop steels that will suit
construction in these regions. In an earthquake, lateral loads
are generated, the magnitude of which can be over 10 times
that of other type of design lateral load, i.e., wind. Due to this
lateral load, besides constant vertical load exerted by a tall
structure, steels used in structures are expected to exhibit
sufcient strength, higher tensile to yield strength ratio (UTS/
YS) (Ref 2, 3), and energy dissipation capacity (i.e., elevated
internal friction and good elongation). Over and above, the
toughness (Ref 4) is also an important property to resist brittle
fracture particularly in subzero climatic condition. These
properties can be achieved at low cost by thermomechanical
treatment (TMT) (Ref 5) in a rolling mill. Rebars being a massproduced constructional material, its cost should be low for
large-scale usage. Generally, carbon-manganese rebar in semikilled or killed variety is used. Higher carbon and manganese in
rebar have adverse effect on weldability and impact toughness.
Therefore, to maintain these properties at acceptance levels,
various possibilities to lower carbon and manganese which
impart strengthening were explored. These are alloying with
phosphorus, higher than that normally found in mild steel,
microalloying by vanadium/niobium, and alloying with
B.K. Panigrahi was formerly with Research and Development Centre
for Iron and Steel, Steel Authority of India Limited.
B. K. Panigrahi, Research and Development Centre for Iron and Steel,
Steel Authority of India Limited, Ranchi 834002, India and
Gandhi Road, Contai, West Bengal 721401, India. Contact e-mail:
dr.bkpanigrahi1948@gmail.com.

Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance

chromium. The latter (chromium rebar) is used at very high

strength level (yield stress: 600 MPa, min.) (Ref 6).
Previous studies on low-carbon corrosion-resistant TMT
rebar have shown that besides improving corrosion resistance,
phosphorus contributes toward strength, without adverse effect
on ductility when carbon is low (Ref 5). In phosphorus-bearing
low-carbon steels, the atoms of phosphorus are in solid solution
of a-iron causing the strengthening effect of ferrite without
adverse effect on ductility. Since the Gibbs free energy for grain
boundary segregation of phosphorus (
49 kJ/mol) is higher
than carbon (
72 kJ/mol) at 773 K, which is in the neighborhood of temperature of equalization for phosphorus-bearing
TMT rebar, carbon preferentially segregates at the grain
boundary displacing phosphorus (Ref 7, 8).
Due to technoeconomic consideration, vanadium microalloyed rebar and titanium microalloyed rebar were not produced
substantially. The former (vanadium rebar) requires higher
quantity of ferrovanadium addition to achieve equivalent
strength, and the latter (titanium rebar) must be produced as
killed steel. Therefore, microalloying with niobium in semikilled steel has been used. Tables 1, 2, and 3 show composition,
process parameters, and mechanical properties and microstructure of some semikilled rebar steels, respectively (Ref 5, 6, 9).
To lower the cost of steel without adverse effect on
mechanical properties, (a) higher phosphorus (0.11 wt.%) and
(b) low-niobium (0.009 wt.%) rebars have been produced. In
this article, the microstructure-related properties particularly the
Charpy impact toughness of these rebars have been highlighted.

2. Materials and Methods

The steel for reinforcing bar was produced in a 250 T twin
hearth furnace, and cast as 9000 kg ingots. The ingots were
rolled to 325 9 325 mm blooms and then to billets of size
105 9 105 mm. The billets were reheated at 1453 to 1473 K.
The processing of billets to TMT rebar of diameter 32 mm was
done in a continuous bar mill having roughing, intermediate,
and nishing stands followed by a cooling unit. From the

Volume 19(2) March 2010287

Table 1 Composition (wt.%) of some semikilled rebar steels

Steel
C-Mn
C-Mn-Nb
C-Mn-V
C-Mn-Cu-P
C-Mn-Cu-Cr
C-Mn-Cr

Mn

Si

Nb

Cu

Cr

Ref

0.20
0.21
0.25
0.15
0.14
0.25

1.2
1.0
1.27
0.9
0.9
1.42

0.05
0.06
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.05

0.03
0.036
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.02

0.02
0.022
0.02
0.09
0.02
0.02

0.02

0.05

0.30
0.34

0.52
0.54

9
9
9
5
5
9

Table 2 Processing parameters of some semikilled rebar steels

Steel
C-Mn
C-Mn-Nb
C-Mn-V
C-Mn-Cu-P
C-Mn-Cu-Cr
C-Mn-Cr

Diameter of
rebar, 1023 m

Reheating
temperature, K

Finish rolling
temperature, K

Rolling speed,
m/s

Cooling rate,
K/s

Equalisation
temperature, K

Ref

32-45
32-45
32-45
32-36
32-36
32

1453-1473
1453-1473
1453-1473
1453-1473
1453-1473
1453-1473

1223-1273
1273-1323
1273-1323
1223-1273
1223-1273
1223-1273

6-8
6-8
6-8
6-8
6-8
6-8

200-250
200-250
200-250
200-250
200-250
200-250

793-853
813-873
813-873
773-823
773-823
773-823

9
9
9
5
5
6

Table 3 Tensile properties and microstructure of some semikilled rebar steels

Microstructure
Yield stress,
MPa (min.)

UTS,
MPa (min.)

Elongation,
% (min.)

C-Mn
C-Mn-Nb
C-Mn-V
C-Mn-Cu-P
C-Mn-Cu-Cr

415
415
415
500
500

485
485
485
545
545

14.5
14.5
14.5
12
12

Tempered
Tempered
Tempered
Tempered
Tempered

C-Mn-Cr

600

660

10

Tempered martensite

Steel

nishing stand, the bar passed through this cooling unit in

which pressurized water is circulated on the bar to chill the bar
surface at 180 to 200 K/s, immediately forming a rim of lath
martensite (M), while the core still remains austenitic (A). On
emergence from the cooling unit, the temperature of the bar
reaches a steady value (equalization temperature) due to
transfer of heat from the core to the rim, and the martensite
of rim is tempered. The core nally transforms to a mixed
microstructure comprising ferrite (F) of varying morphologies,
pearlite/carbide (P)/bainite (B). The schematic of the process is
shown in Fig. 1. The rolling speed and nish rolling temperature was 6 to 8 m/s and 1223 to 1273 K, respectively, and the
equalization temperature was 833 to 873 K. The nish rolling
temperature and the temperature of equalization, after the bar
leaves the cooling unit, play dominant role in controlling
the microstructure and mechanical properties of the rebar
(Ref 5, 9).
Transverse specimens for metallography were machined
from the rebar and polished for microstructural investigation
after etching in 2% nital. Vickers microhardness of rim and core
regions was measured with a load of 50 9 10
3 kg. Tensile test
was conducted using duplicate unmachined rebar in accordance
with ASTM A 370 Standard (Ref 10) in a 60 kN servohydraulic testing machine. In the tensile test, a gage length of 5.65A

288Volume 19(2) March 2010

Rim

Core

martensite
martensite
martensite
martensite
martensite

Ferrite + Pearlite
Ferrite + Pearlite
Ferrite + Pearlite
Ferrite + Pearlite
Ferrite + Pearlite
+ Bainite + Carbide
Ferrite + Bainite

Ref
9
9
9
5
5
6

Fig. 1 Schematic of CCT diagram of a TMT rebar (A = austenite;

F = ferrite, P = pearlite/carbide; B = bainite; M = lath martensite)

was used, where A is the effective cross sectional area of the

rebar and is given by: M/Lq; M is the mass of rebar in 10
3 kg,
L is the length of rebar in 10
2 m, and q is the density of steel
in 103 kg/m3. The test was done at a cross head speed of
50 9 10
3 m/60 s. Charpy impact toughness was evaluated

Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance

Fig. 2
zone)

Location of Charpy specimen in the rebar (TZ = transition

Fig. 4 Optical microstructures of core regions: (a) phosphorus steel

and (b) niobium steel (PF = polygonal ferrite; P = pearlite/carbide;
AF = acicular ferrite)

Fig. 3

Location of TEM rod sample in the TMT rebar

using longitudinal specimens of size 5 9 10 9 55 9 10
3 m

machined from the location shown in Fig. 2 to preserve the rim
as far as possible, and tested at 298, 273, 253, 233, 213, and
193 K in accordance with ASTM E 23 standard (Ref 11). For
preparation of transmission electron microscopic (TEM) specimens, sample of size 5 9 5 9 20 9 10
3 m was cut from the
location shown in Fig. 3. From this sample, 0.5 9 10
3 m thick
disc was cut by a thin disc cutter. The disc was further reduced
mechanically to 0.1 9 10
3 m thick foil and electrolytically
thinned in a twin jet polisher using a solution of 5% perchloric
acid and 95% glacial acetic acid at 293 K. The operating
voltage was 60 V. Foils were observed at 150 keV.

Table 4 Typical chemical composition of experimental

rebar steels and relevant standards
Experimental steels
Elements, wt.%

P steel

Nb steel

C-Mn steel

C
Mn
Si
S
P
Nb
Al
N

0.077
0.59
0.03
0.023
0.11

0.017
72 ppm

0.095
0.56
0.06
0.017
0.019
0.009
0.0045
68 ppm

0.21
1.14
0.05
0.029
0.021

Relevant standards
Elements,
wt.%

3. Results
3.1 Chemical Composition
The chemical composition of the experimental and standard
steels is given in Table 4. The carbon and manganese in the
TMT rebar have been brought down by about 50% with respect
to conventional level of 0.20 and 1.20%, respectively. Although
it is a solid solution strengthener and a hardenability enhancing
element, silicon was kept low to improve the tonnage yield of
steel. The required hardenability was ensured through phosphorus (Ref 12) or niobium (Ref 13, 14).

Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance

C
P
S

IS 1786-2008

ASTM A 706-96

AUS 4671-2002

0.30 max

0.30 max
0.035 max
0.035 max

0.22 max
0.050 max
0.050 max

3.2 Microstructure of the Rim

The optical microstructures of the core and rim regions are
shown in Fig. 4 and 5 for phosphorus and niobium steels,
respectively. The rim which is 4 mm thick depicts primarily
low-carbon bainite (LCB) (Ref 15) in both phosphorus and
niobium steels. A typical bright eld TEM image of LCB is

Volume 19(2) March 2010289

Fig. 5 Optical microstructures of rim regions: (a) phosphorus steel

and (b) niobium steel (LCB = low-carbon bainite)

shown in Fig. 6(a) for phosphorus steel and in Fig. 6(b) for
niobium steel. The bainite, which has high dislocation density,
is associated with interlath and intralath carbides (cementite)
some of which are aligned in the direction of lath axis (Fig. 6a).
The rim of niobium steel was literally free from niobium
carbonitride precipitates, though carbides (C) were present in
the bainitic ferrite. The presence of LCB in TMT rebar can be
explained as follows. Due to low carbon and manganese
content, the nose of CCT diagram was close to the temperature
axis, i.e., shifted leftward, and the time available for martensite
rim development was short (Fig. 1). In view of this, the
martensite rim was not formed in the prevailing conditions of
processing. However, according to literature, martensite
(Ref 16) with small amount of retained austenite (Ref 17) can
form on quenching this low-carbon steel in water, since
solubility of carbon in a-iron at about 323 K is 1 to
2 9 10
4 wt.% (Ref 18). The average microhardness (Fig. 7)
of the rim at a distance of 1 mm beneath the surface of TMT
rebar in phosphorus and niobium steel was 283 and 256 VHN,
respectively which is similar to the hardness of bainite
(300 VHN) (Ref 19) and was quite lower than the hardness
of low-carbon-tempered martensite (400 VHN) (Ref 16).

Fig. 6 Bright eld TEM image of rim in (a) phosphorus steel and
(b) niobium steel (C = carbide)

3.3 Microstructure of Transition Zone and Core

3.4 Tensile Properties

The transition zone (Fig. 2) which was about 2 mm thick

experienced cooling rates that favored transformation to bainite.
The core showed primarily ferrite with pearlite/carbide. The
ferrite has two morphologies, namely polygonal (P and Nb
steel) or equiaxed type and nonpolygonal (Nb steel) or acicular
type. The polygonal ferrite grains are less ner (12.2 9 10
3 m)
in phosphorus steel than in niobium steel (8.5 9 10
3 m), and
consequently the core hardness of niobium steel was higher
(210 VHN) compared to phosphorus steel (193 VHN).

The tensile properties of the experimental phosphorus and

niobium steels and a C-Mn steel are given in Table 5 together
with those by ASTM A 706 (Ref 2) and IS 1786 standards
(Ref 20). The elongation of phosphorus steel was higher (25%)
than niobium steel (18%) due to its relatively lower strength.
Presence of different microstructural constituents produced
good combination of yield strength, YS (428/472 MPa), tensile
strength, UTS (539/564 MPa), elongation (25/18%), and tensile
to yield strength ratio (1.25 and 1.19) in phosphorus and

290Volume 19(2) March 2010

Fig. 7 Variation of microhardness across rim and core of TMT

rebar

Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance

niobium steels, respectively. The UTS/YS ratio of niobium steel

was relatively lower (1.19) due to ner microstructure of the core
region that raised its overall yield strength. This is because yield
strength of TMT rebar with composite microstructure comprising
rim, transition zone, and core is given by the law of mixture:
YS of rebar % area of rim  YS of rim
% area of TZ  YS of TZ
% area of core  YS of core

Eq 1

A ner microstructure raises YS by Hull-Petch relationship,

whereas the UTS is mainly inuenced by solid solution
strengthening element such as phosphorus and volume fraction
Table 5 Typical tensile properties of experimental rebar
steels compared with relevant standards
Experimental steels

Yield stress, MPa

UTS, MPa
UTS/YS
Total elongation, %

P steel

Nb steel

C-Mn steel

428
539
1.25
25.0

472
564
1.19
18.0

463
594
1.28
20.0

of pearlite (Ref 21). A higher UTS/YS ratio is essential for

construction, and the desired UTS/YS ratio varies from 1.15 to
1.40 (Ref 2, 3). The strengthening in the composite (mixed)
microstructure of TMT bar is due to a combined effect of
operative mechanisms in as-rolled ferrite-pearlite and quenched
and tempered steels which are mainly grain size and lath size
effects, solid solution hardening, and transformation strengthening. The elongation is inuenced by microstructure and
strength of the steel. Absence of coarser pearlitic colony and a
predominantly ferritic core structure in this low-carbon steel
resulted in good elongation.

3.5 Charpy Impact Toughness

Figure 8 shows the variation of Charpy absorbed energy
with temperature of the three rebars under evaluation. The
decrease of toughness on lowering the temperature from RT
(298 K) to 253 K was small. Even at 253 K, the Charpy impact
energy was quite high, namely 82 and 120 J for phosphorus
and niobium steels, respectively, compared to 45 J for C-Mn
steel. The ductile-brittle transition temperatures (DBTT) calculated by 50% maximum energy criterion (Ref 22) are 223 K,
below 193 K, and 248 K for phosphorus, niobium, and C-Mn
steels, respectively.

Relevant standards
IS 1786-2008 ASTM A 706-96 AUS 4671-2002
Yield stress, MPa
UTS, MPa
UTS/YS
Total elongation, %

Fig. 8

415 min.
485 min.

14.5 min.

420-540
550 min.
1.25 min
12 min.

500-600

1.15-1.40
10 min.

4. Discussion
4.1 Toughness of Phosphorus Steel
High fracture toughness is greatly desired for construction in
seismic areas, particularly where ambient temperature is low, to

Subsize Charpy energy vs. temperature curves of (a) phosphorus steel; (b) niobium steel; and (c) carbon-manganese steel

Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance

Volume 19(2) March 2010291

avoid brittle fracture. In this study, the observed subzero

toughness of phosphorus steel is similar to a killed titanium
microalloyed (C 0.30, Mn 1.14, Si 1.24, S 0.029, P 0.026, Ti
0.036 wt.%) reinforcing hot-rolled bar steel: 25 to 32 mm
diameter with ne ferrite-pearlite structure and having Charpy
absorbed energy of 73 9 104 J/m2 at 213 K measured using
full-size Charpy specimens (Ref 23). Due to presence of
different microstructural constituents ahead of notch, a crack
propagates through a variety of microstructures and is hindered
at numerous boundaries of bainitic ferrite laths and polygonal
ferrite grains (Ref 24, 25) as a result of which DBTT was
lowered. Low percentage of carbon and manganese in this steel
had also played a key role in lowering the DBTT (Ref 5, 26).

4.2 Toughness of Niobium Steel

Niobium addition in steel increases the yield strength by
grain renement and precipitation strengthening (Ref 21). The
former effect improves the toughness. The DBTT of niobium
steel was the lowest (below 193 K). In a low-carbon steel,
niobium promotes transformation to acicular ferrite due to
segregation of solute niobium to the austenite/ferrite boundary
(Ref 27, 28) as well as increases bainitic hardenability (Ref 13,
29), resulting in a mixed microstructure. In a mixed microstructure, though there is tendency of brittle fracture initiation in
the coarser polygonal ferrite grains because of strain concentration, the polygonal ferrite grains in niobium steel were ner
than phosphorus steel resulting in lowest DBTT because DBTT
is related to ferrite grain size (Ref 21) as follows:
bT ln b
ln C
ln d
1=2 ;

Eq 2

where b and C are constants, T is the DBTT, and d is the

grain size.
The Nb(CN) precipitates, if formed, can lower the toughness. The approximate expression for the solubility product of
Nb(CN) in austenite is given by (Ref 30)
log10 wt:% Nb  wt:% C 12=14 wt:% N
6770=T 2:26
Eq 3
where T is the solution temperature of niobium carbonitride
in K. The solution temperature of niobium carbonitride in the
present steel is about 1273 K. On reheating billets above
1273 K, niobium carbonitrides are dissolved in austenite.
Under normal cooling condition, on lowering the temperature
below solution temperature of niobium carbonitride, reprecipitation is expected. Since the nish rolling temperature of the
bar was about 1273 K, carbonitride could not have precipitated before the bar entered the water cooling unit. Inside the
cooling chamber, due to high rate of cooling, the diffusion
rates are adversely affected, and the precipitation of Nb(CN)
was insignicant in rim, though ne Nb(CN) can form in the
core of rebar.

5. Conclusions
The results of two low-carbon constructional TMT reinforcing bar steels containing 0.11% phosphorus and 0.009%
niobium are summarized below:
1. Both the steels have good combination of yield strength
(P steel: 428 MPa, Nb steel: 472 MPa), tensile strength

292Volume 19(2) March 2010

(P steel: 539 MPa, Nb steel: 564 MPa), and elongation

(P steel: 25%, Nb steel: 18%).
2. The phosphorus and niobium steels with UTS/YS ratio
1.25 and 1.19 exhibited DBTT of 223 K and below
193 K, respectively.
3. Transformation to a mixed microstructure comprising
low-carbon bainite and ner polygonal/acicular ferrite
was primarily responsible for lower DBTT in these
steels.

Acknowledgments
Thanks to the management of Steel Authority of India Limited,
Bhilai Steel Plant and R&D Center for Iron and Steel, Ranchi
where the work was carried out.

References
1. R. Van der Voo, W. Spakman, and H. Bijwaard, Tethyan Subducted
Slabs Under India, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett., 1999, 171(1), p 720
2. Standard Specication for High Strength Low Alloy Structural Steel;
Standard Specication for low Alloy Steel Deformed Bars for Concrete
Reinforcement, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 01.04,
American Society of Testing Materials, West Conshohcken, PA,
1996, p 148149, 344348
3. Reinforcing Steel Materials, Clause 7.2, Australian Standard, 2002
4. H. Shimaoka, K. Sawamura, and T. Okamoto, New Construction
Materials for Social Infrastructures, NKK Tech. Rev., 2003, 88, p 8899
5. B.K. Panigrahi and S.K. Jain, Impact Toughness of High Strength Low
Alloy TMT Reinforcement Rebar, Bull. Mater. Sci., 2002, 25(4),
p 319323
6. B.K. Panigrahi, Relationships of Microstructures and Mechanical
Properties of a Fe/Mn/Cr Rock Bolt Reinforcing Steel, J. Mater. Eng.
Perform., manuscript ID JMEP-08-12-1085, submitted 07 December
2008 (under review)
7. H.J. Grabke, Effects of Impurities in Steels on Mechanical Properties
and Corrosion Behaviour, Steel Res., 1987, 58, p 477482
8. B.K. Panigrahi, S. Srikanth, and G. Sahoo, Effect of Alloying Elements
on Tensile Properties, Microstructure, and Corrosion Resistance of Reinforcing Bar Steel, J. Mater. Eng. Perfom., 2008. doi:10.1007/
s11665-008-9336-z
9. B.K. Panigrahi, Unpublished Results, R&D Center for Iron and Steel,
Steel Authority of India Ltd., Ranchi, India, 2008
10. Standard Test Methods for Mechanical Testing of Steel Products,
Methods for Testing Steel Reinforcement Bars, Annual Book of ASTM
Standards, Vol 03.01, ASTM, West Conshohocken, PA, 1995, p 182
11. Standard Test Methods for Notched Bar Impact Testing of Metallic
Materials, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 03.01, American
Society of Testing Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, 2005, p 160
186
12. D.J. Naylor and W.T. Cook, Heat Treated Engineering Steels, in
Materials Science and Technology, Vol. 7, R.W. Cahn, P. Hassen, and
E.J. Kramer, Ed., VCH Publishers, New York, 1992, p 433488
13. K. Easterling, Introduction to Physical Metallurgy of Welding,
Butterworths Publishers, London, 1983, p 48103
14. A.J. DeArdo, J.M. Gray, and L. Meyer, Fundamental Metallurgy of
Niobium Steel, in Niobium, H. Stuart, Ed., AIME, Warrendale, PA,
1984, p 685759
15. B.L. Bramtt and J.G. Speer, A Perspective on the Morphology of
Bainite, Metall. Trans., 1990, 21A(4), p 817829
16. D.S. Clark and W.S. Varney, Physical Metallurgy for Engineers, East
West Press, New Delhi, 1968, p 142242 (East West Edition)
17. E. Houdremont, Handbuch der Sonderstahlkunde (Handbook of
Special Steels), 3rd ed., Springer Verlag, Berlin, 1956, p 1571449
(in German)
18. E. Hornbogen, Physical Metallurgy of Steels, in Physical Metallurgy,
R.W. Cahn, Ed., North Holland, Amsterdam, 1970, p 589653
19. I.B. Timokhina, P.D. Hodgson, and E.V. Pereloma, Effect of Deformation Schedule on the Microstructure and Mechanical Properties of a

Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance

20.

21.
22.
23.

24.

Thermomechanically Processed C-Mn-Si Transformation Induced

Plasticity Steel, Metall. Trans., 2003, 34A(8), p 15991609
Specication for High Strength Deformed Steel Bars and Wires for
Concrete Reinforcement, Indian standards IS 1786, Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi, 2008, p 110
W.C. Leslie, The Physical Metallurgy of Steels, Chapter V, VI,
Hemisphere Publishing, New York, 1981
W. Dahl, Mechanical Properties, Steel, Vol I, Springer Verlag and
Verlag Stahl Eisen, Dusseldorf, 1992, p 203378
V.A. Kharchenko, K. Safonova, A.I. Ivanov, I.V. Savchenko, and T.A.
Ivleva, Effect of Mn and Ti on Cold Resistance of Reinforcing Steel,
Russ. Metall. (Metally), 1987, 5, p 158160
A. Galibois, M.R. Krishnadev, and A. Dubey, Control of Grain Size and
Substructure in Plain Carbon and High Strength Low Alloy Steelsthe
Problem and the Prospect, Metall. Trans., 1979, 10A(8), p 985995

Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance

25. D.V. Edmonds and R.C. Cochrane, Structure-Property Relationships in

Bainitic Steels, Metall. Trans., 1990, 21A(6), p 15271540
26. L. Pauling, The Nature of the Chemical Bonds, Cornell University
Press, Ithaca, NY, 1960
27. C.I. Garcia, Transformation Strengthening of Microalloyed Steels,
Microalloying
95, M. Korchynski, Ed., June 11-14, 1995 (Pittsburgh,
PA), ISS-AIME, Warrendale, PA, 1995, p 365375
28. C. Li, Study of Low Carbon Steel, Steel Times Int., 2001, 25(5), p 31
32
29. O. Kwon, K.J. Lee, J.K. Lee and K.B. Kang, Modelling for Austenite
Evolution and Transformation for Microalloyed Steels, Microalloying

95, M. Korchynski, Ed., June 11-14, 1995 (Pittsburgh, PA), ISSAIME, Warrendale, PA, 1995, p 251261
30. T.N. Baker, Microalloyed Steels, Science Progress, Vol 65, Blackwell
Scientic Publisher, Oxford, UK, 1978, p 493542

Volume 19(2) March 2010293